Yes, the UE/LE split came from the medical industry as a way to maximize profits. I am not sure why the OT and PT professions did not see this and do something about it.
David A. Lehman, PhD, PT Associate Professor Tennessee State University Department of Physical Therapy 3500 John A. Merritt Blvd. Nashville, TN 37209 615-963-5946 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit my website: http://www.tnstate.edu/interior.asp?mid=2410&ptid=1 This email and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential information and is intended solely for use by the individual to whom it is addressed. If you receive this correspondence in error, please notify the sender and delete the email from your system. Do not disclose its contents with others. ________________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Carson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:53 PM To: Bill Maloney Subject: Re: [OTlist] OTlist Digest, Vol 43, Issue 17 Bill, I am still digesting your message, but I want to make a quick comment. Earlier, someone asked how OT became cornered into UE treatment. I don't KNOW the answer but now I'm wondering if productivity demands aren't part of the reason. Any opinions out there? Ron ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Maloney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subj: [OTlist] OTlist Digest, Vol 43, Issue 17 BM> OK, time for me to chime in. Been reading long enough, and felt the need to BM> offer some thoughts, hopefully insightful and helpful but more than anything BM> else just an "amen", to this thread. BM> The productivity "problem" isn't unique to HH, or any other profit-driven BM> setting. And, let's not kid ourselves here people....we hear all the fancy BM> mission statements and "recruiter speak" from any/all organizations; and, BM> while they sound good, at the end of the day the ONLY mission that matters BM> is PROFIT. Like it or not, agree or not, that is the FACT. It's no wonder BM> that those clinicians (of whichever discipline) who support that mission are BM> the stars. So, there obviously is no solution to this situation. BM> I've been fortunate enough over the years to dodge disciplinary action due BM> to low productivity (which is almost a forgone conclusion if you focus on BM> quality of care, or if the employer has low OT census). And, for what it's BM> worth Ron, my current HH employers productivity standard for OT is 32 BM> points/week (OT initial evaluation counts as 1.5 points and subsequent BM> visits are weighted as 1). I have, for the past year and a half of BM> employment, consistently run around 20 to 25 points. Of course, many of my BM> PT colleagues run higher than that for the same reason you mentioned, they BM> do 10 to 15 minute visits (yes, this is verified and factual). I have BM> personally witnessed nurses do 5-minute visits. BUT, I literally cannot BM> tell you how many patients say, unsolicited, to me things like, "I get so BM> much more out of your visits than that other guy/gal." Duh! Of course they BM> do!!! I am actually taking the time to listen, intervene, teach, treat, BM> care...provide a valuable and obviously relevant (to them) service. This BM> gets back to my employers, via various avenues, and I guess the positive PR BM> in some ways outweighs the productivity deficit. I can relate to what you BM> said, Ron, when you leave a patients home sweating and exhausted from your BM> beautiful efforts, and the only feedback you get from the boss is that your BM> productivity is low. All the while, the clinicians who exceed the quota, BM> yet SUCK clinically and ethically, get the praise! It's honestly so BM> disgusting at times, I wonder why I/we bother. But then I remember that BM> little man/woman who looks me right in the eye and tells me, in their own BM> words how much they appreciate what I do. That may not immediately impact BM> others' knowledge of "what OT is" but I truly believe it's a start. I know BM> that doesn't "solve" our plight, but isn't that why we do what we do BM> anyway? At some point, I/we have to believe that we'll impact a difference BM> in this grass-roots way. BM> There is a new OT publication beginning circulation, "Today in OT" (GHG BM> Gannett Healthcare Group, a subsidiary of Gannett Company, Inc. [USA Today]) BM> which ended up in my mailbox this week. I also get "Advance for BM> Occupational Therapy Practitioners" but not sure how these find me since I BM> am not a current member of AOTA, or the Texas OT Assn. (a story for another BM> time I suppose). I am not a literature snob, but know that these are not BM> the benchmark references for evidence-based practice. But some of the BM> articles are interesting, informative and thought-provoking nonetheless. BM> Interestingly enough, one article in particular in "Today in OT" entitled BM> "Improving Your Ability to Think Critically" was written by an RN who was BM> highlighting OTs in particular for this being a leader in this skill. Also, BM> the cover article was entitled, "By Leaps and Bounds - OT gains momentum as BM> one of the best professions." I have to believe that at some point OT will BM> evolve into what we all want and so richly have earned through our daily, BM> grass-roots struggles. BM> While I acknowledge my posting has not solved or resolved anything, I hope BM> that I have placed at least a small amount of "hoorah" in your day. Hang in BM> there. By the read of these postings, our profession is in good hands. I BM> believe there are enough of us out here who practice sound, evidence-based BM> and relevant Occupational Therapy to advance our profession. I enjoy BM> reading these posts, so keep 'em coming. BM> Bill Maloney, OTR BM> Dallas, Texas -- Options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] -- Options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
